Appraising 2015
Utilisation of state institutions on a regular basis would facilitate in correcting the civil-military imbalance
The writer is a retired lieutenant general of the Pakistan Army and a former federal secretary. He has also served as chairman of the Pakistan Ordnance Factories Board
If we were to assess 2015, it would be fair to generalise that Pakistan, after a long spell, has overcome the worst and seems set on a trajectory that could lead to incremental progress and stability. This, by no means implies that our major problems have been resolved or are near resolution. But surely, the government and state institutions are more responsive to the challenges and people more hopeful. Incidents of terrorism, as hard statistics indicate, have definitely reduced, from 5,496 in 2014 to 3,625 in 2015. The counter- insurgency operation in North Waziristan, the last bastion of global, regional and local insurgents, has been almost cleared and the army is engaged in clearing the remaining militants from the Shawal Valley. The credit for this largely goes to General Raheel Sharif, Air Chief Marshal Sohail Aman and the brave officers, soldiers and airmen, many of whom laid down their lives combating terrorists and insurgents. This is no mean achievement considering that between 2004 and 2009 many parts of the country were falling like dominos to the TTP and the country’s leadership was looking helpless. It was General (retd) Kayani who initiated the major campaign in South Waziristan as well as auxiliary operations in Fata. It was, however, under the command of General Sharif that the army undertook the most challenging assignment of clearing sanctuaries in North Waziristan and Khyber. It was this major operation that rolled back the tide and turned the tables against the TTP and other militant groups. What may be lost to many is that it was under democratic civilian governments, despite their initial hedging, that the military offensive gained momentum! This shows that when state institutions work in unison, chances of success are far greater. A lot still remains to be done to neutralise the radical ideology that has governed the thinking of militants. Unless this aspect is comprehensively addressed, a stream of young recruits will continue to fall prey to militancy.
The introduction of military courts for three years was an expedient measure to expedite terrorism-related cases. Meanwhile, it is expected that the government will strengthen the civilian judiciary by introducing appropriate legislation and taking measures to protect judges, lawyers and witnesses so that terrorism-related cases can be decided on merit without fear. However, there is hardly any progress in this field. In addition, salient features of the National Action Plan remain neglected. The area of reform of madrassas and the monitoring of private schools has not been seriously addressed. The state’s inability to act against the Lal Masjid cleric and procrastination in compliance of the death sentence handed out to Mumtaz Qadri is most disturbing. The double standards that are apparent in compliance of judicial sentences and weakness in prosecuting glaring cases are a manifestation of the lack of commitment of our leaders to the rule of law. Besides, this also reaffirms the state’s fragility in the eyes of the international community. The soft attitude towards the Jamatud Dawa and certain other militant groups is inconsistent with the state’s declared policy of zero tolerance against such outfits. The federal and Punjab governments have been deliberately lax in dealing with radical religious groups operating in southern and central Punjab. This differential treatment raises concerns as these groups enjoy government protection by virtue of their political affiliation.
The prime minister’s commitment to providing better public transport and developing a network of national highways is commendable. The announcement of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is another landmark achievement. But the high cost and lack of complete transparency have made some of the projects controversial.
The most glaring and serious failure of federal and provincial governments, with the exception of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, is their indifference and inability to accord the highest priority to the education and health sectors and focus on the elimination of corruption. These glaring weaknesses have to be dealt with on an emergency basis as this has ramifications on every major sphere of national activity.
Last year also witnessed the prime minister’s lack of interest in utilising state institutions as tools of efficient governance. He rarely attended parliament and few laws were passed; consequently his party members and the opposition failed to give parliamentary proceedings the importance these deserved. Cabinet meetings were not held with regular frequency, nor were meetings of the Cabinet Committee for National Security convened. This reflects the personalised style of governance, which the prime minister seems to prefer. This compromises the quality of decision-making and democratic development is thus thwarted. Greater participation in parliament of top leaders on a regular basis will strengthen democracy and enhance the image of political parties. Utilisation of state institutions on a regular basis would facilitate in correcting the civil-military imbalance.
On the foreign policy front, serious moves initiated to improve relations with India and Afghanistan remained in a state of flux and were vulnerable to activities of non-state actors. The future course of relationships basically depends on how Pakistan is able to overcome the internal challenge of militancy and the extent of transparency it exhibits regarding the policy towards militant groups. US-Pakistan relations clearly moved ahead because of the military’s successful campaign in North Waziristan, greatly reducing the threat to foreign forces in Afghanistan. There was also better understanding and convergence over ways to bring the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table. The wider agenda of relations covering energy, education, counterterrorism and defence, when fully actualised, could make the relationship a more enduring one.
Pakistan’s decision to stay away from the Yemen conflict was a prudent one. Not doing this would have got us entangled into a political and military minefield. It is facing another Hobson’s choice of whether to be an active part of the Saudi coalition of 44 countries that is supposed to be against the Islamic State and other militant groups. Regrettably, the coalition has acquired sectarian overtones due to the exclusion of Iran and Iraq. While Pakistan has joined the Saudi coalition, it would like to play a conciliatory role here. It deeply values its strategic relations with Saudi Arabia, but would also like to maintain strong and cordial relations with Iran. Pakistan will continue to face formidable challenges on the domestic and external fronts in the future. What creates hope is that it is better positioned to tackle these than in the past.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 6th, 2016.
The introduction of military courts for three years was an expedient measure to expedite terrorism-related cases. Meanwhile, it is expected that the government will strengthen the civilian judiciary by introducing appropriate legislation and taking measures to protect judges, lawyers and witnesses so that terrorism-related cases can be decided on merit without fear. However, there is hardly any progress in this field. In addition, salient features of the National Action Plan remain neglected. The area of reform of madrassas and the monitoring of private schools has not been seriously addressed. The state’s inability to act against the Lal Masjid cleric and procrastination in compliance of the death sentence handed out to Mumtaz Qadri is most disturbing. The double standards that are apparent in compliance of judicial sentences and weakness in prosecuting glaring cases are a manifestation of the lack of commitment of our leaders to the rule of law. Besides, this also reaffirms the state’s fragility in the eyes of the international community. The soft attitude towards the Jamatud Dawa and certain other militant groups is inconsistent with the state’s declared policy of zero tolerance against such outfits. The federal and Punjab governments have been deliberately lax in dealing with radical religious groups operating in southern and central Punjab. This differential treatment raises concerns as these groups enjoy government protection by virtue of their political affiliation.
The prime minister’s commitment to providing better public transport and developing a network of national highways is commendable. The announcement of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is another landmark achievement. But the high cost and lack of complete transparency have made some of the projects controversial.
The most glaring and serious failure of federal and provincial governments, with the exception of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, is their indifference and inability to accord the highest priority to the education and health sectors and focus on the elimination of corruption. These glaring weaknesses have to be dealt with on an emergency basis as this has ramifications on every major sphere of national activity.
Last year also witnessed the prime minister’s lack of interest in utilising state institutions as tools of efficient governance. He rarely attended parliament and few laws were passed; consequently his party members and the opposition failed to give parliamentary proceedings the importance these deserved. Cabinet meetings were not held with regular frequency, nor were meetings of the Cabinet Committee for National Security convened. This reflects the personalised style of governance, which the prime minister seems to prefer. This compromises the quality of decision-making and democratic development is thus thwarted. Greater participation in parliament of top leaders on a regular basis will strengthen democracy and enhance the image of political parties. Utilisation of state institutions on a regular basis would facilitate in correcting the civil-military imbalance.
On the foreign policy front, serious moves initiated to improve relations with India and Afghanistan remained in a state of flux and were vulnerable to activities of non-state actors. The future course of relationships basically depends on how Pakistan is able to overcome the internal challenge of militancy and the extent of transparency it exhibits regarding the policy towards militant groups. US-Pakistan relations clearly moved ahead because of the military’s successful campaign in North Waziristan, greatly reducing the threat to foreign forces in Afghanistan. There was also better understanding and convergence over ways to bring the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table. The wider agenda of relations covering energy, education, counterterrorism and defence, when fully actualised, could make the relationship a more enduring one.
Pakistan’s decision to stay away from the Yemen conflict was a prudent one. Not doing this would have got us entangled into a political and military minefield. It is facing another Hobson’s choice of whether to be an active part of the Saudi coalition of 44 countries that is supposed to be against the Islamic State and other militant groups. Regrettably, the coalition has acquired sectarian overtones due to the exclusion of Iran and Iraq. While Pakistan has joined the Saudi coalition, it would like to play a conciliatory role here. It deeply values its strategic relations with Saudi Arabia, but would also like to maintain strong and cordial relations with Iran. Pakistan will continue to face formidable challenges on the domestic and external fronts in the future. What creates hope is that it is better positioned to tackle these than in the past.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 6th, 2016.